21–30 of 318 posts
Why not using an alternative to Google play store, at least as a fallback in case of emergency...
The new digital jail model is based on open source grotesquely and absurdely massive and complex software (and more and more private protocols), SDK included (c++/java syntax).
Defense: simple and modular software(SDK included, write simple and plain C, not c++)/protocols, but able to do a good enough job, stable in time. Benchmark: not 47398437829 modules, and each modules could be coded by one normal developer in a reasonable amound of time.
Ideas: to move from one module to another, proper URIs: irc[s]://|ircs:,mailto://,http[s]://,etc. We miss a really simple video/audio conf protocol, I mean REALLY simple (TCP based). Crypto-based authentication and end-to-end crypto will add a lot to do from those client programs to make it easy to use.
We can imagine a One Desktop Application handling most/all of them, optionally deferring some protocol handling to external apps (Basically, what is doing current web engines the wrong way).
I've started frequently getting reviewed (from submission to approval) within hours, sometimes even within 10-15 minutes of submitting to Apple App Store. But it still varies and can take a day. I want to figure out a good cross plat strategy but would not want to ever deal with Play and Google.
It used to be a week!
MS expends an inordinate amount of effort on back compatibility, and much kudos to them. But it vastly increases their attack surface.
Likewise many of the worst things about the unfairly maligned C++ come from a hardcore position on back compatibility: as much as possible, old code, and even old C code, should continue to compile and work as expected, even to the point of linking old binaries to which you’ve lost the source code.
Most people don’t go to that effort and just invalidate old stuff in the name of maintenance, reliability, and security.
Whichever branch cut you take you’re going to cause a problem for somebody. If not, nobody is using your code.
In general yes, but if I look at the apps on my phone I have
A mail client, K9, old UI. This clearly can't be replaced by a web app because I'm using it to look at my mail in a few POP3 servers and then I'll download those messages on my laptop (Thunderbird)
OSMAnd, offline maps and trop recording. Can't be web based.
Password manager, with a local dB synced with Syncthing.
Syncthing.
Epub reader, from files stored on my phone.
Photo gallery, for files on my phone. I backup to my laptop with Syncthing.
Banking apps, that I must use for 2FA in the web sites of those banks.
A network scanner, useful to debug networking issues.
Etc.
Of all the apps that are currently installed on my phone the ones that could be web apps are:
Go4Go, to view game records of pro games.
Elementary.
Chwazi.
> I'm not even sure why are we, as developers, allowing this to happen — there's usually not any good reason to develop mobile applications at all anymore. It's time to move back to open (web) standards and take control back into our own hands! In general yes, but if I look at the apps on my phone I have A mail client, K9, old UI. This clearly can't be replaced by a web app because I'm using it to look at my mail in…
This is a no-win situation. MS expends an inordinate amount of effort on back compatibility, and much kudos to them. But it vastly increases their attack surface. Likewise many of the worst things about the unfairly maligned C++ come from a hardcore position on back compatibility: as much as possible, old code, and even old C code, should continue to compile and work as expected, even to the point of linking old bina…
Anyone knows the impact of not updating on time? Google’s message seems conflicting.